Specifically to your question...I practice concepts in the forms and occasionally visualize the type of opponent[s] I might come up against.

The type of opponent and the number of them, really should dictate the concepts you must internalize to survive a beating.

The mistakes students make, in my view, is to think that their Uechi practice, their conditioning etc., makes them superior to any opponent they might face in the street...because they can kick their legs in, shoken them in the throat etc._

The opponent could be a linebacker type used to heavy contact, or you will be facing multiple opponents, such as it is very prevalent these days in street attacks.

In adrenalized states, such big opponents don't feel much pain anyway, even if you hit them in the 'right spot'...reason why there are documented cases of bad guys shot with .45 caliber bullets in the chest, but keep on coming at you for the kill.

That's interesting. I suppose I thought that, because Sanchin plays so important a role in the foundation of Uechi Ryu, that it would have had, at least to some extent, and at times, a more martial application. I guess I mean that I have never heard of a kata that didn't have a primarily martial application. And the fact that master Kanbum Uechi was only allowed to study the sanchin kata for three solid years. All of the foundational moves, strikes, turns and receiving do seem to have martial applications and translate into each of the other Uechi kata. So I just thought that there would be time spent seeing an opponent while practicing. I do understand the concepts of the three conflicts/three battles and the mind/body/soul.....mind/body/spirit, so there would be a need to focus on those. I guess I'm rambling now but I do appreciate the comments from both of you.

I want to thank you for asking me to contribute to your Forum on the topic of Sanchin. I've found the experience stimulating and gratifying. I've intended nothing of a controversial nature and I sense nothing of the sort in return. I enjoy the fact that everyone feels free to communicate with me even though I'm not their direct teacher.

If I can digress, I'd like to make a comparison between taking responsibility for your students and claiming ownership of your students. What's best for the student is not necessarily what's best for the teacher.

"Teach everyone who comes, chase after no one who leaves" is probably the most familiar quote from late Master Kanei Uechi.

He's describing the mutual respect between a teacher and a student and also acknowledging that students will sometimes need to verify that your dojo is best for them.

They might want to try another dojo or even another style. What does it say about a teacher who bristles at the prospect of comparison?

My students, as you know, have visited your dojo, Art Rabesa's, Charlie Earle's, John Conroy's, George Mattson's and countless others.

Most of the time my permission was sought but not always.

Likewise, my dojo has accomodated many visitors. Some of my students never came back and some of the visitors joined my dojo.

At the end of the day, the dojos began to reflect the intent of their teachers, "everyone on the floor wants to be here."

I had a barber who got mad because someone else in his shop had cut my hair. I told him, " I don't recall selling you the franchise to my head!"

I get my haircut wherever I choose and I give my students the right to train with whomever they choose.

With apologies to barbers, I encourage all teachers to be more like Master Uechi and less like the barber.

I tell a student ...you want to study Uechi...great...now what do you want Uechi-Ryu to do for you...they may or may not know the answer right then and there...they might say something they think you want to hear...OK...

In time, they will make the right choice one way or another, on the basis of who they are and what their true original intent was for being on the floor.